Loading...
1 - Pleasant View Pointe - Pre-Plat Narrative v2 4180 Napier Ct NE Michael, MN 55376 Office: 763.424.1500 www.racheldevelopment.com Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat Narrative To: City of Chanhassen From: Rachel Development, Paul Robinson – Development Director Date: 12/20/2024 A. Submittal Documents 1. Narrative 2. Pre-Plat Plan Set 3. Site Plan Rendering 4. Easement Vacation Exhibit 5. Storm Wa ter Management Plan 6. ALTA Survey B. Applicant and Consultants 1. Developer – Rachel Development, Paul Robinson, Development Director 2. Builder – Charles Cudd Co., Rick Denman, Charles Cudd, Matt Olson 3. Civil Engineer(s) – Alliant Engineering - Tyler Stricherz, Mark Rausch 4. Survey – Alliant Engineering - Dan Ekrem 5. Wetland Consultant – Kjolhaug Engineering, Melissa Barrett 6. Attorneys – Larkin Hoffman, Peter Coyle, Ryan Boe C. Site Basics • Land Use Plan Guiding – Low Density Residential – 1 - 4 units/acre • Zoning – RSF • Development Acres – 14.046 • Owner – Beddor Enterprises, LP • PID’s: 258700063, 258690130, 258710190, 258700060, and 258700062. Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 2 2 D. Introduction On October 14th at the City Council work session, we presented the City Council with a concept plan for developing the Beddor property at 955,1015 Pleasant View Rd. There were two items in particular that we were seeking guidance on as a part of that review. Item one was if we should extend Nez Perce to connect to the Troendle Addition and item two was how, if at all, we should provide an alternative access point to the water tower. After some discussion, the general Council direction was to not connect Nez Perce to the Troendle neighborhood and that staff was going to review the need for an alternative water tower access. Our Concept Plan continues to comply with or exceed the requirements of the RSF zoning district. That said, one variance is required for cul-de-sac length. This comes from listening to the desires of Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 3 3 the adjacent neighbors at the neighborhood meeting and from subsequent City Council direction to not connect Nez Perce Drive. This is addressed in greater detail below. E. Site Characteristics 1. Woodlands We have completed a tree survey and inventory. There are 777 trees that qualifled as signiflcant for the survey. The City enforces tree preservation by evaluating the percentage of tree canopy being removed. The tree preservation plan, inventory and calculations are included on pages 14-18 of the preliminary plat submittal. Based on the City canopy preservation calculations we will be required to plant 91 trees, shown on our landscaping plan, to offset the project impact to the existing canopy. As we mentioned in our concept plan, we did try to keep the majority of trees that boarder the property and we are preserving the two endangered White Walnut (Butternut) trees shown on our survey on Lot 1, Block1 of the Preliminary Plat. 2. Topography The high point on the property is 1046 on the south end of the site near the water tower and the lowest point is 993 in the north pond area. The majority of the southern property generally fiows to the north and to the existing pond offsite to the west, with smaller site areas fiowing offsite to the east and south. Overall, there is around 50 ~ feet of topographical change across the property depending on existing pond depth. Post development the drainage patterns will be similar, however, more area will be captured and routed to a new stormwater management system and areas currently discharging offsite to the west, south and east will be reduced. Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 4 4 3. Wetlands There was much conversation between us and the Technical Advisory Panel (TEP) regarding the status of Pond 1. We felt that there was enough evidence of previous impacts and City approvals to call the pond a pond versus a wetland. In large part that was due to a grading permit issued by the City of Chanhassen on September 4, 1992 which authorized the construction of a new pond (Pond 1 currently on the Beddor property). This permit approved fllling an existing pond on the property and expanding and reconflguring the approved Troendle addition pond. The new pond met the NURP standards for storm water treatment for Troendle Addition but also expanded the ponding area to accommodate future roadway work and additional future development of the Beddor property. Without getting lost in the technical arguments the TEP believed that based on historical aerial photo reviews, not the grading plan approved in 1992, that a portion of the existing pond is historic wetland. At the time we are writing this narrative we have not yet received the formal Notice of Decision from the TEP. What we have heard is that the TEP was comfortable recommending that Wetland 1 and the Historic portion of Pond 1 as shown in our plans be considered wetlands in the Notice of Decision so this is what is included as wetlands in the Preliminary Plat Plan Set and calculations. 4. In our concept narrative we noted that we would be requesting a wetland alteration permit for wetland #1. We are now also expanding that request to include the area now shown as historic remnant wetland within existing Pond 1. We are submitting a wetland alteration permit/replacement plan concurrent with our preliminary plat application. Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 5 5 F. Plan Details • Lots – 19 • Lot Sizes o North Portion 32,745 – 64,625 sf – averaging 42,830 sf o Southern Portion 18,123 – 42,541 sf – averaging 22,746 sf • The set-backs used for the lots follow the required setback of the RSF and are shown on the site plan – see page 5 of the preliminary plat plan set. 1. Roadways • Nez Perce – As mentioned in the introduction the preliminary plat does not include a Nez Perce connection to the Troendle neighborhood. A number of neighbors at the neighborhood meeting mentioned not wanting the connection for fear of cut through traffic and that changing the exiting traffic pattern which has been in place for over 30 years did not seem necessary. A neighborhood representative also explained the neighborhood’s desires during the concept review with the City Council. The exhibit shown on the next page and a sperate plan provided with the submittal illustrates how a portion of the existing Nez Perce Drive right of way (ROW) will be vacated and a portion of the Nez Perce ROW will be retained. Within the New Perce ROW being retained, the existing roadway will be removed and replaced with a trail. Connected and adjacent to the portion of the Nez Perce ROW being retained is an Outlot A. This Outlot will be dedicated to the City and is 50’ wide to match the width of the ROW. A trail connection to the Troendle Addition will be included within Outlot A and the unvacated portion of Nez Perce. Additionally, the Outlot/ROW corridor will be used for utility connections, portions of driveways accessing homesites within Pleasant View Pointe and could also serve as a roadway connection in the future if there ever was a need for such a connection. Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 6 6 With the removal of the Nez Perce Drive connection Peaceful Lane will now continue south terminating in a cul-de-sac. While the ROW width has historically been 50’ in this area, the ROW width will be 60’ and roadway 31’ wide consistent with current City standards. No sidewalk is proposed which is consistent with the surrounding neighborhoods. • Redman Lane/Peaceful Lane - A portion of peaceful land(AKA Redman Lane) which extends to the water tower was previously approved to be vacated by the City. It appears that vacation may never have been recorded. We are working with our title company to determine the official status and will either vacate Redman Lane or incorporate it into our plat as needed. 2. Easements and Vacations With our Preliminary Plat there will be a number of vacations needed to move and relocate roadways and other various easements beyond those described above. These are shown below on the following page and also on a separate exhibit provided with the submittal. Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 7 7 3. Variance Request With the changes described above to Nez Perce the length of cul-de-sac for Peaceful Lane will now be roughly 1,040’ long, exceeding the city standard of 750’. During concept review, it appeared that the Council and Staff would accept this variance and understood that it was a necessity if Nez Perce Drive was not connected. There was also discussion about other similar precedents within the City. A couple examples include: Della Drive at the Bluffs at Lake Lucy 1,350’ cul-de-sac approved in 2020, Gunfiint Trail 1,210’ in Highcrest Meadows approve in 2005, and Preserve Court 1,230’ in Preserve at Rice Creek approved in 2015 to name a couple. Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 8 8 4. Traffic Comments received from residents who participated at the neighborhood meeting are attached as an exhibit. a. Lake Lucy Road - There were a number of residents living along Lake Lucy Road, in particular, that were concerned about increased traffic creating further dangerous conditions on Lake Lucy Road. It appears to us that not connecting Nez Perce should help ameliorate those concerns. b. Peaceful Lane/Pleasant View Road – Similarly a resident on Peaceful Lane and on Pleasant View Road expressed concerns about traffic onto Pleasant View Road and asked that a direct connection to Powers Blvd should be considered. Adding an additional intersection onto Power Road (County Road 17) does not seem practical or likely to be approved by the City or County vs using Pleasant View Road which is already classifled by the City as a collector roadway. 5. Storm Water The proposed stormwater management plan will modify and enlarge the existing pond. The storm sewer inlet from Troendle additional will remain (alignment will be modifled) and proposed pond outlet will be installed in the same location as the existing pond storm sewer outlet. Currently the pond is sized to handle the wet volume NURP storage for the onsite drainage area as well as for the portion of the Troendle addition already draining to the pond. In addition to the NURP treatment there is a flltration bench that will treat the required watershed water quality volume of 1” over the proposed impervious surfaces. The flltration bench will include an underdrain/fllter submersed within a specially designed soil mix. As a part of the revised storm pond and storm water treatment system we will need to vacate a portion of the City’s previous drainage and utility easement . It will be reconflgured to coincide with the new treatment system. Additionally, we will be looking at if and how the pond could be expanded in the future to help provide additional storm water treatment from Pleasant View Road in the future when that roadway is reconstructed. The image on the next page shows and how the D & U is being modifled and expanded from 1.28 acres to 1.81 acres to accommodate additional area and work with the development plans. Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 9 9 6. Utilities Pleasant View Pointe will be served by existing sanitary sewer and watermain adjacent to the site. Sanitary sewer will be connected to existing sewer within Peaceful Lane with the addition of a new manhole and new trunk sewer extending south within the proposed cul-de-sac to service proposed lots 4-5, block 1 and lots 1-13, block 2. Proposed lots 1-3, block 1 will have right of way frontage along Pleasant View Lane and will make use existing sewer services previously installed. Proposed lot 6, block 1 will make use of the existing sewer service provided to the lot from Nez Perce Drive. Trunk watermain will be installed, extending an existing watermain within Nez Perce Drive west to the proposed cul-de-sac connecting to the existing watermain within Peaceful Lane. Proposed lots, 4-5, block 1 and lots 1-13, block 2 will connect to new watermain services on a new trunk watermain. Proposed lots 1-3, block 1 will use the existing services provided from Pleasant View Lane watermain and lot 6, block 1 will use the existing water service provided from Nez Perce Drive. There are existing sanitary sewer and watermain and services along the west property boundary in Redmen Lane ROW. These utilities will not be connected to and will be abandoned for those sections not currently servicing an existing resident. Sanitary sewer and water service will remain for those utilities currently providing service to the existing homes along Peaceful Lane. Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 10 10 7. Builder As mentioned above we are working with Charles Cudd Co. on this neighborhood. Below are some examples of the types homes that could be built in this neighborhood. 8. Outlots In the concept plan there were two Outlots, however, the proposed plan only has one, Outlot A. As described above, this outlot is for the connection between Pleasant View Pointe and Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 11 11 Troendle for a trail, utility connections, driveways and possible a roadway if ever needed in the future. The second Outlot which was shown in the concept plan but is not included in the Preliminary Plat was to provide a secondary connection to the water tower. Staff reviewed the need for this connection after concept review and asked us not to include it in the preliminary plat. This was also an item that a number of the Lake Lucy road residents had objected to at the neighborhood meeting. G. Neighborhood Meeting As mentioned, several times in this narrative, on July 31 we held a neighborhood meeting on the Pleasant View Pointe development plans. Approximately 30 people came to the meeting. We gave a presentation and answered a number of questions. I summarized many of the questions in the narrative we provided for the concept review. Attached is an exhibit with the same summary provided with the concept review. H. Closing We are looking forward to discussing our development plans with you. Please let us know if there is any additional information you would like to help inform your review. Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 12 12 Exhibit A – Developer Comment Summary from the July 31, 2024 Neighborhood Meeting 1. Traffic Concerns - Concerns about traffic in general and construction traffic are combined. There were slightly differing concerns about traffic during construction and traffic overall. a. Residents on Peaceful Lane – NOTE: There are only two residences on Peaceful Lane. The owners of one of the residences were in attendance and were concerned about the Nez Perce connection to Peaceful Lane and the traffic that they would now be experiencing. They would prefer no connection to Peaceful Lane. The Peaceful Lane resident liked the idea from the Pleasant View resident(s) that there should be a connection to Powers or that the development use Nez Perce going south without a connection to Peaceful Lane. Concerned if a connection was made to Peaceful that the roadway could not handle the wear and tear. Also, concerned that the intersection of Peaceful and Pleasant view is dangerous and cannot handle the additional traffic safely. b. Residents on Pleasant View – There were not a lot of residents in attendance from Pleasant View. Those there did not think there should be any connection to Pleasant View but that the development should connect directly to Powers instead. There was some mention of a promise made by the City Council to not connect to Pleasant View and of actions made by Frank Beddor to make a connection to Pleasant View more difficult. (NOTE: Pleasant View is considered a minor collector in the City/County roadway system) c. Residents on Nez Perce and Troendle Circle – In general concern about cut through traffic. Residents do not see the beneflt or need to connect Nez Perce. They think that all would be better off without this connection. Less traffic potential for those on Nez Perce and for those on Pleasant View and Peaceful Lane. They said they would support the project if Nez Perce was turned into a cul-de- sac/hammerhead with no through connection to Nez Perce. d. Residents on Lake Lucy Rd – In general residents on Lake Lucy Road have concerns about the amount and speed of traffic on their roadway. Concerns about safety and that connecting the development to Nez Perce will create more traffic and a potential cut through for traffic after construction and create a route for construction traffic during construction. 2. Stormwater Drainage into Lot 13 – The owner of the home adjacent to Lot 13 said they currently receive a lot of water from the Beddor property (and also City water tower property). There was a concern that this could get worse with development. Mark Rausch, the developers engineer, let the homeowner know that the watershed area fiowing into her property would actually be reduced and while there would still be some water it will be less Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 13 13 water after development than prior to development. In general, we cannot control water coming from areas not on our property. 3. Residents adjacent to Lot 11 – The residents of the two homes on Troendle Circle behind Lot 11 were concerned about how close the homes would be to their homes. They asked if there was any way that we could adjust to lots to make the distance larger. Our response was that it may not be possible we are meeting the standards of the zoning district but that we would look at additional plantings to help screen the lots from each other. 4. Water Tower Access Road – The residents along Lake Lucy Rd adjacent to, across from and near this potential access strenuously object to having this become a water tower access. They believe they were told by the City that this would never be needed or used as an access. Some residents had called and talked to the City Engineer and were told that no plans were being considered. We let residents know that this was coming from Charlie the Public Works Director and that he would be the one to contact. There is a 50’ wide outlot in this location. Another resident said he thought the adjacent neighbor was offered to buy the property from the City at one point. 5. Existing Tree Lines – Owners of homes adjacent to the Beddor property implored us to save the trees on the Beddor property adjacent to their properties. We said that it was generally in our mutual interest to do so. We said will try to save as many of the trees along the property lines as possible. 6. Storm Water a. Concern about Christmas Lake – Do not want any water quality impacts to the lake due to this development. We stated that we will be required to meet stormwater management requirements of the City and MCWD for rate, quality and volume control. 7. City Sanitary Sewer & Water a. Concerns about Water Pressure – neighbor(s) stated that they have very low water pressure (40 psi) and wanted to know how this could impact them. b. General questions about how we would connect to City sewer and water. 8. General Questions a. How will the lots along Pleasant View connect to the roadway system. We said that they would directly access Pleasant View much like the neighboring properties. b. Concern about lot sizes relative to neighborhood - We said they are the same if not larger than the neighboring lots. c. Is the existing home being torn down? – We indicated that the existing home would be torn down. Pleasant View Pointe – Preliminary Plat December 20, 2024 Page 14 14 d. Would there be model homes or spec homes? – We said yes that there would likely be a spec home/model home. e. Questions about allowable work hours. We did not know exactly but said Monday – Saturday with Saturday we thought 7:00 a.m. – 7:00 p.m. and no work on Sunday. f. Question about how long the development buildout would take. We mentioned we thought it would take about 3 years. 9. Types & Price of Homes - We said in general we saw the homes on the 15,000 sf lots being 1 ½ story to 2 story homes starting in the 1.3 million range. The large lots would be custom lots with a wider range of overall value above that. 10. Lot Layout/Density a. Size of Lots - Residents asked why the lots south of Nez Perce are smaller than the 6 proposed north of Nez Perce – explanation was provided that all lots meet current zoning and the design was created to match the existing lot sizes in each area. b. Larger or Fewer Lots/No Development – In general if the residents could waive a magic wand, they would have not development or would have fewer larger lots. We let the residents know that we are meeting/exceeding the standards of the zoning district and that we are on the very low end of what could be allowed based on the Comprehensive Plan guiding which could allow up to 4 units/ ac.